The same quotation already quoted from Roger of Wendover [High10] also illustrates "foolhardy or reckless behaviour whose risks the individual does not recognise", suggesting that the king misplaced his confidence in his ability to fund mercenary support:
Quod cum regi Anglorum nuntiatum fuisset,omnimodis cum regina sua vivebat deliciis, cum qua simul se credidit omnia possidere; habebat
146
praeterea spem in immensitate pecuniae quam collegerat, quasi per ipsam posset terras quas amiserat revocare.
(Coxe, 1841)p181 he was enjoying all the pleasures of life with his queen... moreover, he felt confidence in the immensity of the wealth he had collected, as if by that he could regain the territory he had lost.
(Giles, 1849)p214 These comments are also prefaced by others by Wendover made in similar vein, suggesting that the king's misplaced confidence led to his abandonment by the barons [HIGH10]:
"Sinite illum facere, ego, quicquid modo rapit, uno die recuperabo;" ... Comites vero et barones et alii de regno Angliae nobiles, qui ei eatenus fideliter adhaeserant, talia audientes eiusque desidiam incorrigibilem intelligentes, impetrata licentia, quasi illico reversuri, remearunt ad propria, rege cum paucis admodum militibus in Normannia derelicto.
(Coxe, 1841)p171, 172 "Let him do so; whatever he now seizes on I will one day recover"and neither these messengers, nor others who brought him like news, could obtain any other answer ... when they [earls and barons of England] heard his words and saw his incorrigible idleness, [they] obtained his permission and returned home pretending that they would come back to him and so left the king with only a few soldiers in Normandy.
(Giles, 1849)p207
Recklessness might also be inferred from high-handed behaviour and there is evidence that King John was heavy handed in the exercise of justice during Winter 1200/01 [HIGH4]. Stenton, a modern historian writes: "No justice uninstructed from above would surely impose so heavy a fine as 100 marks for a trespass" and notes "Howden's indignation at the fines imposed on northerners for forest offences while the king was perambulating the north in winter." (Stenton, 1952)Vol1,p121. Likewise, following his success at Mirebeau (Aug1202, HIGH6), the King's high handed attitude to the ambitious William des Roches led to his subsequent defection to the French king, along with Amery of Thouars, that "weathercock of fortune".This started a haemorrhage of baronial support in Poitou and Anjou.(Powicke, 1913)p153.
Recklessness might equally appear as arrogance, a term used by the writer of William Marshal's Histoire who noted: "But all the time the King's pride and arrogance increased; they so blurred his vision that he could not see reason."(Holden and Gregory, 2002)lines 12500-03.
"Risks the individual does not recognize" might be seen as poor political judgement, as shown by the king's over-optimism in the loyalty of the Lusignan family and William des
147
Roches, his lack political foresight in the destruction of Dol, which further inflamed the Bretons or his excursion to Norham (1209) which was both unexpected by the Scots and unwelcomed by his barons and army. If the bipolar thesis is upheld for a moment, King John's thinking may have been coloured by high creativity and complexity, and his understanding confounded by the "impaired perception of facial emotion" especially that of disgust, an emotion that might have been registered by the barons. (Lembke and Ketter, 2002)
Comment
Wendover appears to consider that King John indulged in reckless behaviour and implied that the king was not aware of his misjudgment. Behaviour that appears high-handed is found in King John's exercise of justice, his interpersonal relationships and his military ventures, and is suggestive of both recklessness and lack of insight. All dateable accounts relate to periods of
HIGH travelling activity.
5.2.5 Inflated Self Esteem and Grandiosity
Inflated self esteem and grandiosity in a king is perhaps difficult to differentiate from royal pomp and pageant, although that may be a modern expectation. King John's father Henry II, was first crowned on 19th Dec 1154 and then held three ceremonies within short succession during 1157/58 (Bury St Edmunds (19th May 1157); outside Lincoln (25 Dec. 1157) with his last at Worcester (17 July 1158).(Eyton, 1878)pp1,26,31,&35. Gillingham, a modern historian, notes that while regular crown wearing at the major festivals had been customary with the Norman kings, its practice had been discarded by Henry II. Despite this, his brother Richard held a crown wearing ceremony with the King of Scots at Winchester on 17 April 1194. (Gillingham, 1978)p242.
Against this backdrop, King John was first crowned on 27 May 1199 and again at Westminster with his Queen on 8 Oct 1200 [LOW2]. According to Norgate, a modern historian, crown-wearing became part of repeated acts of high ceremony including Easter 1201 at Canterbury (25March 1201,[HIGH 4]).(Norgate, 1902)loc929, 1132, 1147. However the exact number of these events has not been established by this study although Turner infers their repetition and describes their context:
148
John's lack of proportion ... at one moment to enhance the royal dignity, undone by his "indecent levity" at another. He sported splendid trappings ... celebrating feast days with crown-wearing....
(Turner, 1994)p16.
Equally for example, Church has suggested that since John was transporting the crown and regalia he "planned to have a crown-wearing ceremony and since he was in York on 30 and 31 August [1212], it is likely that this is where it took place." [HIGH21]
Other circumstantial evidence of grandiosity might be postulated from King John's expansive hospitality before the aborted venture against the Count d'Eu and his Lusignan relatives: the " ten tuns" [of wine] which was consumed "on the hill of Porchester [9-14 May 1201 LOW3]in Southampton, in the king's departure ... and two and two at Fareham, and three at Brockenhurst, and three on the king's ship."" – a total of 20 tuns where 1tun=982litres=1,309 modern bottles.(Stenton, 1937)pp xii, 84,123,124.
Inflated self-esteem is also associated with overconfidence, although this can sometimes only be inferred, such as King John's leisurely response to the rebellious activities of the Count of Eu during Spring 1201 [High4]. Wendover comments have already been noted but in this context demonstrate not only the inappropriateness of his self belief: "Let him do so; whatever he now seizes on I will one day recover" but its fixity: "neither these messengers, nor others who brought him like news, could obtain any other answer". This comes close to satisfying the clinical criteria for a delusion:
a belief that is held firmly but on inadequate grounds, is not affected by rational argument or evidence to the contrary, and is not a conventional belief that the person might be expected to hold given his cultural background and level of education.
(Gelder, 2005)p6
Perhaps another example of King John's overconfidence is the so-called veiled reference to Arthur's death sent as a verbal message to his mother on 16th April 1203 [HIGH8] where a measure of reserve might have been more appropriate, as might the use of a closed letter rather than a patent one.(Church, 2015)loc1891. Equally, King John's heavy handedness is discussed in Section 5.4.1 and could also be regarded as a marker of inflated self-esteem.
Comment
Again Wendover is the primary source of evidence for inflated self-esteem or grandiosity with the suggestion that the king's self-belief bordered on a delusional state. Later sources and opinion provide circumstantial evidence of high ceremonial events and liberal hospitality. All
149
dateable accounts relate to periods of HIGH travelling activity except for the second coronation (8 Oct 1200 [LOW2]) which, it could be argued, was different in nature to crown wearing and done to ensure the status of his second wife. Likewise although the wine was drunk during 9- 14 May 1201 [LOW3],it was undoubtedly ordered during [HIGH4] which ends 7 May 1201.